User talk:Loving servant
Welcome Hi, welcome to ! Thanks for your edit to the Corruption Inducement page! Please leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything! Kuopiofi (talk) 21:31, April 22, 2013 (UTC) Well, to date no-one has complained about it, so as far as I know you can take what you want. --Kuopiofi (talk) 14:01, May 2, 2013 (UTC) Save the photo to your computer, go to Photos in On the Wiki and from there it should be pretty clear.--Kuopiofi (talk) 14:32, May 2, 2013 (UTC) Since it appears on Wiki Activity, you'll find out as soon I get around doing that power, but you should bear in mind that that list is basically simply a reminder for myself what powers need to be done at some point. I update it as the ideas pop up, so it can take time before the inspiration hits. --Kuopiofi (talk) 14:24, May 13, 2013 (UTC) Already argued once about Soul Absorption pic, gif that shows power in use trumps still pic that doesn't. --Kuopiofi (talk) 06:04, January 13, 2016 (UTC) you're welcome. L12345 (talk) 00:57, March 21, 2016 (UTC) Response Hello got your message, check the comment section of Nihilism Embodiment.--CNBA3 (talk) 03:01, March 28, 2016 (UTC) Stop messing with Entity Creations. --Kuopiofi (talk) 11:33, September 24, 2017 (UTC) Either drop it or take a weeks timeout for ignoring direct order from Admin. Your choice. --Kuopiofi (talk) 11:37, September 24, 2017 (UTC) 6. Do not change the content of a existing page for your benefit. :6b. While chancing existing page to extend, keep the basic idea in mind. Chancing/expanding the concept beyond the point the basic concept isn't there goes definitely too far. If you want to hold on the idea, make a new power. 14a. Ignoring warnings and mass-repeating rule-break in short amount of time (3/day) gives Admin right to slap you as fast and hard as they feel like. :14b: Blatantly flaunting rules after having been told of them, even if by non-Admin, results instant and long block. Third time, that's a weeks timeout. Don't try to complain I didn't warn you. Or that you didn't have time to contact me. --Kuopiofi (talk) 11:43, September 24, 2017 (UTC) To Kupiofi, I apologize for not seeing your messages in time, as well as not being clearer until it was late about my reasons for editing. That said, I was editing Entity Creation and its derivatives due to the power, at least as I understand it, being more than just an offshoot of Formulated Attacks (and I am according to comments not the only one), as we already have a page for that and it makes the power confusing, though I do realize there is some overlap. As for the introductory section (is that the right term for the inital words at the top?), the "or shape it into certain shapes"''' '''part does not makes sense and seems an example of poor phrasing, as well as the wording seeming to lean more towards manipulation in general than entity creation, which is more specific. I hope you can understand my reasoning, I simply wish for the powers on this Wiki to be both clear and accurate, in both description and connections with each other. If I am wrong please explain why in as much detail as you can, because I do not one to make such a grave misunderstanding (if it is the case) on my part again.Loving servant (talk) 12:12, September 24, 2017 (UTC) Chancing block to 1 day as you had a point just before I gave the timeout, but before that removing more really wasn't good idea. Please contact Admins in future when you notice something like that instead of just going and making large changes, there either is reason why things are like that or they haven't noticed the problem and may be willing to help. --Kuopiofi (talk) 12:12, September 24, 2017 (UTC) BTW, you posted just before I posted the last message. --Kuopiofi (talk) 12:14, September 24, 2017 (UTC) Page name is bit confusing, as it creates basically temporary constructs able to some level of independence of the User. --Kuopiofi (talk) 12:16, September 24, 2017 (UTC) To begin with, it's named creature creation as when the power was created, the first thing come to mind what could be created was obviously some being/creature. The idea that it could be used to create other things came later and for various reasons none thought to change the names. To expand the last explanation (business elsewhere for a moment), point of the power isn't so much of what you create (could be animal, weapon, geometric shapes, whatever), but that after that you don't need to wield or in various extends even direct them. You could create few dozen swords, program/tell them to attack enemies and they go for it without further need for supervision. Does that explain it better? --Kuopiofi (talk) 12:30, September 24, 2017 (UTC) Thank you for understanding what I was trying to say, on that part about expanding the definition of entity creation, wouldn't things like the sword example you gave fall under a combination of Construct Creation and Sentient Weaponry? At least that's the feel I get from something like that. As for not contacting an admin, I had no idea that that was necessary, I've made and seen changes of all kinds without any issue. In any case, I'd say that would mean Entity Creation and its variations need some strong overall, beyond just the kinds of changes I thought. Also, to be honest, I find myself a little confused by how you phrased your responses to me before, it came off (to me at least) a little condescending, even at the beginning, and I don't appreciate getting the feeling someone is talking down to me, even if I am in the wrong I am not being corrected If the sword was permanent and created separately as individual item, then yes. But in this case it's temporary, result of this power and created for specific reason. Contacting Admin isn't really needed, it's simply that we tend to have more background info for why powers are like that. We usually were around when the powers were done/heard the first arguments. I've been thinking about it a bit and while there is something that can be saved, there needs to be quite an overhaul. Phrasing things so what the power does is clear isn't always easy... Might need to work it out with more than few people, toss the ideas around and so on. Getting SageM involved might be a good idea as he's hard worker, even if he does tend to be abrupt/blunt. Sorry if I came up that way, I've been doing quite a few things today so I just wrote the first thing that came to mind and moved elsewhere. --Kuopiofi (talk) 15:28, September 24, 2017 (UTC) I'm posting this to both SageM and Loving servant as you both are/were involved with Entity Creations last Edit mess. I'm also removing your timeout. After talking with Ls I thought about EC a bit and came to conclusion that it is doing work of several powers and none of them well. As is, it's pretty much Constructs Creation with addition of being independent/programmable while leaving the entity/creature part as barely more than mention, and that's the reason it's on Constructs Creation. It's also in Attack Powers but only making the blast shaped into certain shape doesn't really add anything. Basically my thinking is that EC is reworked so it and its Variations go back to purely creature/entity creation and new power that deals with independent/programmable powers is done. I think we either need to do third which would allow the shaping of attacks to larger effect to AP, or the whole thing is simply removed. --Kuopiofi (talk) 17:40, September 24, 2017 (UTC) I'd say something along the lines of your ideas work, if you don't mind my opinion. The differentiation between manifestation for attacks and making a more complex entity would be interesting.Loving servant (talk) 17:52, September 24, 2017 (UTC) As I don't really pay attention to other peoples Talk-pages, could you send your answers to my Talk-page in future? Took some time to realize you might have posted the answer here... -_-; Personally I think that removing all mentions of other than creature from introduction and the independence part in Capabilities would be the basic level. --Kuopiofi (talk) 04:37, September 25, 2017 (UTC)